Working days lost to sickness (2)

Anne Clarke: According to the Corporate Performance Digest, the LFB have not met their 2.48% target for “working days lost to sickness – FRS staff” since November 2013. Are you able to explain why 2.48% is the target and whether it has been reviewed to see if it is appropriate?

The Mayor: This headline target was reviewed and agreed when the current London Safety Plan was approved in 2017 and has not been revised since.As part of the development of London Fire Brigade (LFB)’s Community Risk Management Plan (CRMP) the target will be re-evaluated in line with information that is currently available on FRS national average sickness figures.
The high levels of sickness absenceacross all staff groupsremains a concern andis being monitored closely. This will help to inform theupdatedWellbeing Strategy which has been developed so that staff are clear about the availability of the LFB’s wellbeing service from a promotion, prevention and treat perspective. These arealigned to the three main themes of psychological, physical and workplace wellbeing which reflectLFB’ssickness absence data reporting.

Working days lost to sickness (1)

Anne Clarke: According to the Corporate Performance Digest, the LFB have not met their 3.65% target for “working days lost to sickness - operational staff” since at least April 2013. Are you able to explain why 3.65% is the target and whether it has been reviewed to see if it is appropriate?

The Mayor: This headline target was reviewed and agreed when the current London Safety Plan was approved in 2017 and has not been revised since.As part of the development of London Fire Brigade (LFB)’s Community Risk Management Plan (CRMP) the target will be re-evaluated in line with information that is currently available on FRS national average sickness figures.
The high levels of sickness absenceacross all staff groupsremains a concern andis being monitored closely. This will help to inform theupdatedWellbeing Strategy which has been developed so that staff are clear about the availability of the LFB’s wellbeing service from a promotion, prevention and treat perspective. These arealigned to the three main themes of psychological, physical and workplace wellbeing which reflectLFB’ssickness absence data reporting.

LFB Funding

Anne Clarke: You have called on the Government to increase LFB baseline funding by £3 million, which, among other things, will help to maintain an increased number of inspecting officers to support the introduction of the Building Safety Regulator. What response has the Government given to this call for further funding?

The Mayor: As part of my submission to the Spending Review, I called on Government to provide the funding required to enable London Fire Brigade to deal with the ongoing challenges within the built environment and support changes when the Building Safety Bill becomes law. LFB has yet to receive the full details of the Spending Review and expects to receive more detailed information on its funding allocation before the end of the calendar year.

Working days lost to sickness (4)

Anne Clarke: Please breakdown the figures in the corporate performance digest for a) “working days lost to sickness - operational staff”; b) “working days lost to sickness – FRS staff”; c) “working days lost to sickness – Control staff”; into short term and long-term sickness. Please provide the monthly data going back to April 2013.

The Mayor: The information is available on a quarterly basis. The tables below show the quarterly short-term and long-term lost working days to sickness since April 2013 for operational, control and FRS staff.
Operational Staff - rolling 12-month sickness
Financial Year
Quarter
Lost Working Days
Short Term Lost Working Days
Long Term Lost Working Days
2013/14
Q1
4.5%
1.7%
2.8%
2013/14
Q2
4.3%
1.7%
2.7%
2013/14
Q3
4.3%
1.7%
2.7%
2013/14
Q4
4.3%
1.7%
2.6%
2014/15
Q1
4.4%
1.7%
2.7%
2014/15
Q2
4.6%
1.8%
2.9%
2014/15
Q3
4.9%
1.8%
3.1%
2014/15
Q4
5.1%
1.9%
3.2%
2015/16
Q1
5.1%
1.9%
3.3%
2015/16
Q2
5.3%
1.9%
3.3%
2015/16
Q3
5.2%
1.9%
3.3%
2015/16
Q4
5.2%
1.9%
3.2%
2016/17
Q1
5.4%
2.0%
3.4%
2016/17
Q2
5.4%
2.0%
3.4%
2016/17
Q3
5.4%
2.0%
3.4%
2016/17
Q4
5.4%
2.0%
3.5%
2017/18
Q1
5.5%
2.0%
3.5%
2017/18
Q2
5.5%
1.9%
3.5%
2017/18
Q3
5.5%
2.0%
3.5%
2017/18
Q4
5.6%
2.0%
3.6%
2018/19
Q1
5.6%
2.0%
3.6%
2018/19
Q2
5.7%
2.0%
3.6%
2018/19
Q3
5.7%
2.0%
3.7%
2018/19
Q4
5.6%
1.9%
3.7%
2019/20
Q1
5.7%
1.9%
3.8%
2019/20
Q2
5.6%
1.9%
3.7%
2019/20
Q3
5.6%
1.9%
3.7%
2019/20
Q4
5.7%
1.9%
3.8%
2020/21
Q1
5.4%
1.6%
3.8%
2020/21
Q2
5.2%
1.5%
3.7%
2020/21
Q3
5.3%
1.5%
3.8%
2020/21
Q4
5.3%
1.5%
3.8%
2021/22
Q1
5.7%
1.8%
3.9%
2021/22
Q2
6.5%
2.2%
4.2%
Control Staff - rolling 12-month sickness as a percentage
Financial Year
Quarter
Lost Working Days
Short Term Lost Working Days
Long Term Lost Working Days
2013/14
Q1
6.7%
1.3%
5.4%
2013/14
Q2
6.4%
1.3%
5.1%
2013/14
Q3
6.1%
1.2%
4.9%
2013/14
Q4
5.6%
1.0%
4.6%
2014/15
Q1
6.2%
1.1%
5.1%
2014/15
Q2
6.8%
1.3%
5.6%
2014/15
Q3
7.2%
1.5%
5.8%
2014/15
Q4
8.1%
1.6%
6.5%
2015/16
Q1
7.5%
1.5%
6.0%
2015/16
Q2
6.6%
1.4%
5.2%
2015/16
Q3
6.6%
1.3%
5.3%
2015/16
Q4
6.2%
1.5%
4.8%
2016/17
Q1
5.9%
1.5%
4.4%
2016/17
Q2
5.8%
1.6%
4.2%
2016/17
Q3
5.1%
1.8%
3.3%
2016/17
Q4
5.1%
1.7%
3.3%
2017/18
Q1
5.7%
1.8%
4.0%
2017/18
Q2
5.6%
1.8%
3.8%
2017/18
Q3
6.6%
1.9%
4.7%
2017/18
Q4
7.4%
2.2%
5.3%
2018/19
Q1
7.9%
2.3%
5.6%
2018/19
Q2
9.1%
2.3%
6.8%
2018/19
Q3
9.3%
2.2%
7.1%
2018/19
Q4
9.5%
2.3%
7.2%
2019/20
Q1
9.2%
2.5%
6.7%
2019/20
Q2
8.2%
2.5%
5.7%
2019/20
Q3
7.5%
2.8%
4.7%
2019/20
Q4
6.8%
2.5%
4.3%
2020/21
Q1
6.8%
2.2%
4.6%
2020/21
Q2
6.8%
2.3%
4.5%
2020/21
Q3
7.2%
1.9%
5.3%
2020/21
Q4
7.0%
2.0%
5.0%
2021/22
Q1
6.7%
2.1%
4.6%
2021/22
Q2
6.7%
2.2%
4.5%
FRS Staff - rolling 12-month sickness as a percentage
Financial Year
Quarter
Lost Working Days
Short Term Lost Working Days
Long Term Lost Working Days
2013/14
Q1
2.7%
0.9%
1.7%
2013/14
Q2
2.5%
0.9%
1.6%
2013/14
Q3
2.6%
0.8%
1.7%
2013/14
Q4
2.8%
0.8%
2.1%
2014/15
Q1
3.1%
0.8%
2.3%
2014/15
Q2
3.4%
0.8%
2.6%
2014/15
Q3
3.4%
0.8%
2.6%
2014/15
Q4
3.2%
0.9%
2.3%
2015/16
Q1
3.1%
0.9%
2.2%
2015/16
Q2
3.2%
0.9%
2.2%
2015/16
Q3
3.4%
0.9%
2.5%
2015/16
Q4
3.9%
0.9%
2.9%
2016/17
Q1
4.1%
1.1%
3.1%
2016/17
Q2
4.1%
1.1%
3.0%
2016/17
Q3
3.9%
1.2%
2.7%
2016/17
Q4
3.5%
1.1%
2.4%
2017/18
Q1
3.4%
1.1%
2.3%
2017/18
Q2
3.5%
1.1%
2.4%
2017/18
Q3
3.6%
1.0%
2.5%
2017/18
Q4
4.0%
1.1%
2.9%
2018/19
Q1
4.0%
1.1%
2.9%
2018/19
Q2
3.8%
1.1%
2.7%
2018/19
Q3
3.6%
1.1%
2.5%
2018/19
Q4
3.3%
1.1%
2.2%
2019/20
Q1
3.3%
1.1%
2.2%
2019/20
Q2
3.5%
1.1%
2.4%
2019/20
Q3
3.8%
1.1%
2.7%
2019/20
Q4
4.1%
1.1%
3.0%
2020/21
Q1
4.0%
1.0%
3.0%
2020/21
Q2
3.7%
0.9%
2.8%
2020/21
Q3
3.2%
0.7%
2.5%
2020/21
Q4
2.9%
0.6%
2.3%
2021/22
Q1
3.1%
0.6%
2.4%
2021/22
Q2
3.3%
0.7%
2.6%

Working days lost to sickness (3)

Anne Clarke: According to the Corporate Performance Digest, the LFB have not met their 4.7% target for “working days lost to sickness – Control staff” since November 2013. Are you able to explain why 4.7% is the target and whether it has been reviewed to see if it is appropriate?

The Mayor: This headline target was reviewed and agreed when the current London Safety Plan was approved in 2017 and has not been revised since.As part of the development of London Fire Brigade (LFB)’s Community Risk Management Plan (CRMP) the target will be re-evaluated in line with information that is currently available on FRS national average sickness figures.
The high levels of sickness absenceacross all staff groupsremains a concern andis being monitored closely. This will help to inform theupdatedWellbeing Strategy which has been developed so that staff are clear about the availability of the LFB’s wellbeing service from a promotion, prevention and treat perspective. These arealigned to the three main themes of psychological, physical and workplace wellbeing which reflectLFB’ssickness absence data reporting.

Fire Safety Order

Anne Clarke: What effect, if any, is the Government’s failure to amend the Fire Safety Order, to implement recommendations of the Grenfell Inquiry having on the ability of the LFB to keep Londoners safe?

The Mayor: The Grenfell Tower Inquiry Phase 1 report recommended requiring building owners and managers to provide improved information about buildings to assist the fire brigade response to incidents. It also recommended placing duties on those responsible for buildings to improve fire safety information that is given to residents and the frequency of checks made to key fire safety measures.
The government is intending to introduce these new measures through fire safety regulations. These will not come into effect until the commencement of the Fire Safety Act, for which we do not yet have a date.
The time it has taken to implement the legislation means the improvements to the protection of the public envisaged by Sir Martin Moore-Bick have still not yet been realised. However, London Fire Brigade is continuing to plan for implementation so as to be able to act when the new legislation and associated guidance comes into effect.